Well yes, if you make a small change, you'd expect a small effect. I read your post several times, and I'm still not really sure what point you are trying to make.

These laws are toothless. "Must answer within 20 days"... or what? With no one held immediately culpable, the law is precisely meaningless.

Heard of anyone going to jail for this?

Heard of anyone paying a fine for this?

Even heard of anyone losing their job for this?

Compare: If you don't do something the government desires you to do, there will be consequences.

This is just like the constitution: "Highest law in the land" -- violate it -- as SCOTUS and congress have done over and over -- and the consequences? Nothing.

Just so you taxpayers know your place. The laws aren't for the government. Those are just laws "for show." The real laws are just for you. Because, you know, they care about you.

The only secure Android phone is what is running Cyanogenmod.

No... the only secure Android phone is the one you pulled the battery out on.

iPhone is trickier... since there's no removable battery: it is very hard to secure. Best bet is to wrap it in tin foil and let the battery drain down on its own, then when it reaches 0% it will be secure

Pretty bad business model. If you have to rely on illegal labor, then you not only have a bad business model, but you are a criminal to boot.

Of course, because I was being terribly facetious. But the argument that higher minimum wage causes unemployment is based on ideology, not math.

The exact same concept would be true if average wages went up. Not completely linearly, of course. because the poorest workers tend to spend more of their income on necessities, while the wealthiest tend to save or invest more.

But the argument, when reduced to it's basics, is that the higher the average wage, the higher the unemployment rate. Utter bullshit. At least in my case, the more I made, the more I spent, and the more I saved. I'll bet it's the same for other people.

Which argument, oddly enough, completely ignores that the consumer is the largest driver of the economy. How can the largest driver of the economy dive the economy when they don't have the money to do it. The early 2000's credit fest probably won't be repeated, as people tried desperately to hold on to their standard of living by going further into debt.

This is not complicated math. If on average, people buy new cars every 5 years, there will be more cars bought than if they bought on average every 10 years.

Another very simple example - My sister has bought exactly 1 computer since 2001. I've bought 10. Who has pumped more money into the economy? Even if the fact that a lot of that goes to China, it still helps with the employment of the sales people at the store. I used that example for that reason.

Call it the trickle up theory if you like. People making money buy stuff. The more stuff bought, the more people work.

Even more, with Government inefficiencies, does it make any sense to allow businesses to pay a wage that requires it's workers to be on the government dole?

I might have much better things to do with my decreased taxes.

This is what I've been preaching for years. What is pushed as "modern capitalism", is pretty much slash and burn. Make no mistake, the real beneficiaries of the working poor are their employers. Via a socialistic program that takes money from you and me, and redistributes it to the employers profit.

Amazingly enough people put up with it.

I am against wage restrictions in general. If you look at Europe, the countries with stronger economies tend to have the fewest working restrictions,

I am against them in principle. Problem is, the minimum wage has been kept artificially low for a long time now. That has created a completely skewed economy, and when a company is allowed to direct it's employees to the welfare system, that just isn't right. The existence of that is a serious symptom of an underlying problem. SO they might be a necessary evil.

You think that Germany's economic system isn't very restricted? The only country among the top ten with a triple-A rating (they are number 4) utilizes a "social Market economy, which is very interesting, but completely impossible in the USAat present. Parts of it are in line with what I preach as the best way to run an economy. It's Capitalism with a moral underpinning.

It's a great read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...

Rhine Capitalism. is pretty active in regulatory measures, considered the direct highway to hell in our system. And no one plans and implements with greater precision and effect than the Germans. It also takes the people in it's country into account. Yet another great read here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...

Basically, it doesn't require it's citizens to be the main enemy of the economy. And damned if it isn't working well. In a system like that you don't need to force employers to pay their employees. They are all pretty much pointed all in the same direction. I think it is a good model. Any "ism" - socialism, capitalism, communism, fascism, will fail and fail big when people try to make it pure. It's because no 'ism is perfect.

But capitalism tempered with moral underpinnings? Pretty much the best thing going in my book.

Is having the county itself provide internet connectivity. We already know that doesn't work.

Don't do that! School districts' should be provisioning their own upstream connectivity.

This is not the type of thing that the county should be handling.

The answer is simple..... put internet services out for bid and buy a big bandwidth contract for the school district.

Yes it's expensive..... it's where a majority of the cost of 20,000 iPads goes.

And it's not fair to be leeching off the local government's resources or forcing 100 school districts to share a limited pipe that cannot reliably meet the requirements.

Yep. The Canadian enforcement bureau wants to see some information... so they make a request to the DOJ.

The DOJ then makes an order for Google to deliver that information to them.

The DOJ looks over the response, and saves a copy of all the juicy data for later reference, just to see if there's anything that might interest them in the future, then they bundle it up, attach it to an e-mail, and forward it unencrypted to their Canadian buddies..

Because cheap. Becausd they value the cheap more than their fellow citizens. Frankly, I think that any employer that knowingly employes an illegal alien should be stripped of their citizenship, then put on the plane with all the drugged deportees. Land them in in whatever country we're shipping them to at the moment .

Then they can come back into America as an illegal alien. If they get shot by border patrol trying to cross into the US Fucking excellent!! Rough justice, most fitting.

But what about when you can't prove date of hire?

I have no hatred towards the individuals. The point is to punish the employer, thus eliminating the market that is causing some businesses to effectively invite large numbers of illegals to come in and work for money under the table under illegal employment conditions.

Why not enfranchize the migrant population. Let's open the borders, and adjust benifits for non-citizens.

The illegals are only able to get work since they can work for such low wages. You could also eliminate the problem of illegals by exempting certain specified non-skilled jobs or completely untrained workers from minimum wage requirements.

The illegals can't be "enfranchized," because this would effectively disqualify them for the jobs that the market wants illegals for ---- which are jobs where they illegally pay undocumented workers below minimum wage. Above minimum wage, they are competing with legal residents for jobs, which causes problems, but most illegals do not have training or skills beyond the simplest of labor.

Give everyone who isn't a violent criminal and who wants it a path to citizenship. Get everyone on the tax rolls, and out of black markets.

I believe that's the case already --- there is a path to legal residency and citizenship available, which many immigrants take: the illegals are just getting an unfair shortcut by ignoring the processes established and required to become a legal resident.

Yeah. Having an Emplant board. I've owned several Amigas, and hung out with several other Amiga owners. Blow it out your arse sideways.

Yes, but alas, the situation is much more complicated than fishing.

You did answer your own question. The subsidies allow WalMart ot pay lower rates than tehy would otherwise have to. If no one could survive on WalMart pay, they wouldn't work there, and th reates would automatically go up.

Once again, you answerd the question. They don't have to pay enough to live on, and part time jobs will allow the employer to not pay any benefits

Lest ye put the part time situation at the feet of the current administration, it has been going on for years. I remember when Sears turned most of their employees into part timers in the early 1980's.

The part time/no benefits model is something that companies use that can really give the shareholders big boners. But it does tend to come at a cost - it burns a big bridge, and is therfore used as a last resort, because it you use part time employees, you get part time employees.

So in this recession, people are desperate to work at whatever they can get. So they take those 32 hour a week, no benefit, not full time jobs.

Frankly, I think that puts the lie to the "lazy American won't work" meme.

So anyhow, waddya want? The companies won't stop until you tell them you won't accept any less pay and benefits, and we have a surprising number of people that think they need to get poorer in order to get the money they deserve. If they could get you to work for the wages they pay the illegals, they would. Or less.

It's a sad day when so many people buy lottery tickets as their retirement plan.